The Washington Post had an interesting story today about cast albums. Admittedly, I own quite a few, and it makes me sad to see how it's becoming harder and harder to produce them. I can't imagine the time when songs from musical theater was popular music, but there was such a time, and it's sad that we're so far past that. There are jukebox musicals, which take popular music and turn it into a musical (and I admit that I'd rather people buy ABBA Gold than the cast recording of Mamma Mia!), but I wonder whether that gets people to see other shows. I somehow doubt it. It is encouraging to see people snapping up copies of CDs at shows...they need to continue to be made. It's how I relive those experiences; I can't imagine seeing a show that really moves me, and not be able to listen to the songs over and over again.
And it's nuts to think that there used to be many versions of shows recorded. Do they still make Broadway and London recordings of shows? I mean, at one point, I had the London, Broadway, Complete Symphonic, and 10th Anniversary recordings of Les Mis. I can't imagine that they'd do that these days. Unfortunately.
(I don't have the Broadway version anymore. What's the point? No Michael Ball.)
Sunday, June 7, 2009
How DO I solve this? (Hint: DVR)
Why do the tv gods hate me? Tomorrow night is a veritable bonanza of shows I want to watch. I already knew the Tonys would be on--with Neil Patrick Harris hosting. Awesome! I'm one of the 10 people who regularly watches the Tonys, so I was already psyched. But then I realized that some idiot at BBC America scheduled the finale of Any Dream Will Do, which is a 2-year-old reality show casting for the part of Joseph in Joseph and the Amazing Technicolor Dreamcoat. And of course I'm watching. How can I not? Some of my earliest memories involve listening to that record. My favorite, Daniel Boys, was tragically cut a few weeks ago (why, Andrew Lloyd Webber, why?) and I've been spoiled on who wins for ages, but I can't miss this show! And afterwards, they're starting to air How Do You Solve a Problem Like Maria?, which was done the year before ADWD and cast the role of Maria in The Sound of Music. Awesome! Surely the people at BBC America had to realize the people who watch shows casting roles in West End productions would want to watch the Tonys, correct? It can't be that big an audience that they think it's a smart idea to split it, right?
And then I was going through the "What to Watch" in last week's Entertainment Weekly when I see that the first episode of The Next Food Network Star ALSO airs tomorrow night. Good Lord, people! Thank God for my dual-tuner DVR.
And then I was going through the "What to Watch" in last week's Entertainment Weekly when I see that the first episode of The Next Food Network Star ALSO airs tomorrow night. Good Lord, people! Thank God for my dual-tuner DVR.
Sunday, May 31, 2009
Carnal embrace and other topics
I first saw Arcadia when I was 17, on a trip to the Oregon Shakespeare Festival with my high school drama class. I enjoyed it, but was confused. In the play, Stoppard addresses concepts like chaos theory and predeterminism and art vs. science. Fortunately, he does it in an engaging way and has some fantastic characters discussing it, meaning that Barb At 17 liked it, if she didn't quite grasp it. In the years since, it's the final image of the play that's stuck with me.
I saw it again last night at the Folger, and again, it's going to be that last image that sticks with me. I appreciated the other elements (and understood them) much better this time around (it's amazing what 13 years will do!), but still...that last image, and all that it symbolizes, is what gets me. It really brings together the themes of the play, but in a poetic way. Love it.
The actors did a fantastic job. Erin Weaver, as the 13-year-old Thomasina in the 1809 world, was a bit over the top, particularly for the last few scenes, when she's supposed to be 16, but I never doubted her relationship with her tutor, Septimus Hodge (Cody Nickell, who has just fabulous hair), which is an important point. Nickell was awesome; it has to be a gratifying role--he's funny and charming and mischievous and a bit of a rake. His is a character easy to fall for. (Let's just say that yes, I did check out Nickell's website. And yes, he is married. Of course.)
The characters in modern times were good as well. I was actually probably most impressed by Peter Stray, who played Valentine. It's a hard character--he's clearly a smart guy, but has to also be completely dense about the literature side of things. When he's first introduced, he comes across as a fool, which he isn't. He's also quite likeable, and I loved his interactions with Hannah (Holly Twyford, who's apparently quite the fixture in DC theater; I've never seen her before and enjoyed her in this). (And holy crap, apparently Stray is Welsh. Fantastic!) (Also married. Of course.)
Seeing it made me wish I ushered at the Folger, just so I could see it a few more times, despite the long running time. And it is quite long. But it didn't feel it.
I saw it again last night at the Folger, and again, it's going to be that last image that sticks with me. I appreciated the other elements (and understood them) much better this time around (it's amazing what 13 years will do!), but still...that last image, and all that it symbolizes, is what gets me. It really brings together the themes of the play, but in a poetic way. Love it.
The actors did a fantastic job. Erin Weaver, as the 13-year-old Thomasina in the 1809 world, was a bit over the top, particularly for the last few scenes, when she's supposed to be 16, but I never doubted her relationship with her tutor, Septimus Hodge (Cody Nickell, who has just fabulous hair), which is an important point. Nickell was awesome; it has to be a gratifying role--he's funny and charming and mischievous and a bit of a rake. His is a character easy to fall for. (Let's just say that yes, I did check out Nickell's website. And yes, he is married. Of course.)
The characters in modern times were good as well. I was actually probably most impressed by Peter Stray, who played Valentine. It's a hard character--he's clearly a smart guy, but has to also be completely dense about the literature side of things. When he's first introduced, he comes across as a fool, which he isn't. He's also quite likeable, and I loved his interactions with Hannah (Holly Twyford, who's apparently quite the fixture in DC theater; I've never seen her before and enjoyed her in this). (And holy crap, apparently Stray is Welsh. Fantastic!) (Also married. Of course.)
Seeing it made me wish I ushered at the Folger, just so I could see it a few more times, despite the long running time. And it is quite long. But it didn't feel it.
Monday, May 25, 2009
Also, that's not what Smithsonian ID badges look like
I saw Night at the Museum: Battle of the Smithsonian last night. It was enjoyable enough, even without having seen the first one (which is lost somewhere in my Netflix queue); it helped that I was in an easily amused mood. And really, any movie that has that much slapping of Ben Stiller is at least somewhat worthwhile. Of course, it also had huge plot holes (proximity to the tablet is what causes the objects to come to life, yes?), most of which I could ignore. I couldn't stop my horrified reaction to what they were doing to the museums, though. So much destruction! I can't even think about it without shuddering.
But what really annoyed me is the depiction of Stiller's character, Larry. Since the first movie, he's become a successful inventor, complete with infomercials (win!). Naturally, this is a bad thing. You can tell because he only makes it back to the museum every couple of months, answers his phone a lot, and an assistant says that he'll have to cancel his daughter's birthday to help prepare for a big presentation (though Larry goes off to work on it by himself). Obviously he has sold out and is now without joy. Because being successful is bad, kids. I'm certainly not one to condone working insane hours (she says, in the midst of spending a good chunk of the holiday doing work), but starting a successful is not a bad thing. I'm sure there are people who are happy being night watchmen at museums, and quite possibly Larry is one of these people, but the message left an overall bad taste in my mouth.
On the other hand, the movie did have Amy Adams. She can do no wrong. Love! In fact, let's all feel better by watching her sing "That's How You Know" in Enchanted:
But what really annoyed me is the depiction of Stiller's character, Larry. Since the first movie, he's become a successful inventor, complete with infomercials (win!). Naturally, this is a bad thing. You can tell because he only makes it back to the museum every couple of months, answers his phone a lot, and an assistant says that he'll have to cancel his daughter's birthday to help prepare for a big presentation (though Larry goes off to work on it by himself). Obviously he has sold out and is now without joy. Because being successful is bad, kids. I'm certainly not one to condone working insane hours (she says, in the midst of spending a good chunk of the holiday doing work), but starting a successful is not a bad thing. I'm sure there are people who are happy being night watchmen at museums, and quite possibly Larry is one of these people, but the message left an overall bad taste in my mouth.
On the other hand, the movie did have Amy Adams. She can do no wrong. Love! In fact, let's all feel better by watching her sing "That's How You Know" in Enchanted:
Thursday, May 14, 2009
NPH FTW!
You know, I didn't think it could get better than Hugh Jackman hosting the Tonys. I was wrong. This year's host is...wait for it...
Neil Patrick Harris. Epic win.
This is going to legendary.
Neil Patrick Harris. Epic win.
This is going to legendary.
Wednesday, May 13, 2009
Running behind
So at some point, I'll post something. Maybe about a couple of books I read! Or some plays I've seen! Or the end of the tv season!
You'll just have to wait and see. Perhaps at some point I'll have time to post. That'd be nice. I imagine it'd be therapeutic to get those thoughts out of my head--like how Dumbledore used the Pensieve. Alas, tonight it is not meant to be.
You'll just have to wait and see. Perhaps at some point I'll have time to post. That'd be nice. I imagine it'd be therapeutic to get those thoughts out of my head--like how Dumbledore used the Pensieve. Alas, tonight it is not meant to be.
Saturday, May 2, 2009
Biblical years: The showdown
I just finished reading My Jesus Year, about an Orthodox Jew who spends a year going to Christian churches and trying to experience Christianity to help him be a better Jew. Fittingly enough, I read The Year of Living Biblically, about an atheist who spends a year living by all the rules found in the Bible (Old and New Testaments). It was interesting reading them back-to-back the way that I did; similar topics, theoretically similar writing styles. Except that I liked YoLB much more than MJY.
I found Jacobs's journey in YoLB much more interesting and relatable than Cohen's in MJY. For one thing, it seemed that Jacobs actually had a journey. As he went through the motions of doing what the Bible said, it actually sunk in (to a certain extent). It was easy to see him start to appreciate taking time to pray, and the benefits of being grateful. By the end of the book, he had grown from the person he was at the beginning.
The same can't be said of Cohen in MJY. He states that he's a rebellious Orthodox Jew, but absolutely nothing about his behavior illustrates this. He still follows the Orthodox laws. His biggest rebellion seems to be that he's interested in seeing what goes on in a church. It's frustrating, because there's a lot about this that could be interesting. He talks a lot about his mother's death when he was a teenager and how this affected his faith at the time...but we jump from that to him in the present, in a different religious mindset. How did this happen? I have no idea. And while he claims that he's trying to understand Christianity, what's actually included in the book shows no indication of it. The episodes included involve him experiencing the most extreme ends of Christianity--snake handling, mega-churches and revivals in stadiums, that sort of thing.
At the beginning of the book, he's at a more typical service and gets upset that the minister is preaching Old Testament passages; he's upset because that's the Jewish part of the Bible, and this Christian minister has no right to interpret it, particularly to interpret it differently than Talmudic scholars. But toward the end of the book, he's in another mainstream Protestant service and says that Christian interpretation of the Old Testament no longer bother him. Why not? Because he's just become immune to it, after experiencing it for a year? Did his perspective actually change? I have no idea!
But really, it boils down to him wanting to experience Christianity without ever even trying to believe in Jesus as the Son of God. Now, I'm not saying that he should convert, but it left a bad taste in my mouth when he wound up not being particularly moved by Christmas, even after admitting appreciating the midnight service--to me, the most moving, spiritual part of the holiday. Well, of course he's left cold by Christmas! He knows it's a material holiday and while he acknowledges that there is a spiritual component...he just kind of ignores it.
Plus, he tries to be funny, but he tries in a way that's obvious. Jacobs's writing is more easy, more naturally amusing. When Cohen includes a line that's humorous, the effort is obvious.
It just bums me out because I think Cohen's book had so much potential. It just totally didn't live up to it. The Year of Living Biblically, though, is totally worth the time. And while My Jesus Year has some interesting, thought-provoking moments, they're just too few and far between to make it worth your while.
(I'd also recommend Bill Wood's review of My Jesus Year on Amazon. Reading it after writing this entry, I find myself thinking, "Yes, exactly!")
I found Jacobs's journey in YoLB much more interesting and relatable than Cohen's in MJY. For one thing, it seemed that Jacobs actually had a journey. As he went through the motions of doing what the Bible said, it actually sunk in (to a certain extent). It was easy to see him start to appreciate taking time to pray, and the benefits of being grateful. By the end of the book, he had grown from the person he was at the beginning.
The same can't be said of Cohen in MJY. He states that he's a rebellious Orthodox Jew, but absolutely nothing about his behavior illustrates this. He still follows the Orthodox laws. His biggest rebellion seems to be that he's interested in seeing what goes on in a church. It's frustrating, because there's a lot about this that could be interesting. He talks a lot about his mother's death when he was a teenager and how this affected his faith at the time...but we jump from that to him in the present, in a different religious mindset. How did this happen? I have no idea. And while he claims that he's trying to understand Christianity, what's actually included in the book shows no indication of it. The episodes included involve him experiencing the most extreme ends of Christianity--snake handling, mega-churches and revivals in stadiums, that sort of thing.
At the beginning of the book, he's at a more typical service and gets upset that the minister is preaching Old Testament passages; he's upset because that's the Jewish part of the Bible, and this Christian minister has no right to interpret it, particularly to interpret it differently than Talmudic scholars. But toward the end of the book, he's in another mainstream Protestant service and says that Christian interpretation of the Old Testament no longer bother him. Why not? Because he's just become immune to it, after experiencing it for a year? Did his perspective actually change? I have no idea!
But really, it boils down to him wanting to experience Christianity without ever even trying to believe in Jesus as the Son of God. Now, I'm not saying that he should convert, but it left a bad taste in my mouth when he wound up not being particularly moved by Christmas, even after admitting appreciating the midnight service--to me, the most moving, spiritual part of the holiday. Well, of course he's left cold by Christmas! He knows it's a material holiday and while he acknowledges that there is a spiritual component...he just kind of ignores it.
Plus, he tries to be funny, but he tries in a way that's obvious. Jacobs's writing is more easy, more naturally amusing. When Cohen includes a line that's humorous, the effort is obvious.
It just bums me out because I think Cohen's book had so much potential. It just totally didn't live up to it. The Year of Living Biblically, though, is totally worth the time. And while My Jesus Year has some interesting, thought-provoking moments, they're just too few and far between to make it worth your while.
(I'd also recommend Bill Wood's review of My Jesus Year on Amazon. Reading it after writing this entry, I find myself thinking, "Yes, exactly!")
Saturday, April 25, 2009
Just turn to your bosom buddy...
I was sad to see that Bea Arthur passed away; I didn't even realize she was sick! Of course, she was 86, so it's not like she was a spring chicken. Still, it's quite sad. And while a lot of people will gush over her turn on The Golden Girls, I'd like to give a nod to her stage work. I had the Mame cast recording on record (well, my parents did...), and she was made of awesome. Behold:
(Even with bonus Brian Stokes Mitchell at the very beginning!)
(Even with bonus Brian Stokes Mitchell at the very beginning!)
Thursday, April 16, 2009
Just the way I am
I was flipping around tonight and found the last half hour of Bridget Jones's Diary. Man, I love that movie. But now all I want to do is watch Colin Firth movies.
...That is all.
...That is all.
Sunday, April 12, 2009
Holiday celebrations, Barb-style
I was out the door this morning and heading to my car when I realized that I didn't have my Jesus Christ Superstar CD with me. I paused for a moment, wondering whether I should go back inside to get it...and totally did. Easter is one of the holidays I use musical theater to celebrate--the other is Independence Day. I always listen to Superstar when I drive up to Baltimore to spend the day with my family, and I try to watch 1776 every July 4. I mean, it's fun to think of history as musical theater, right? (If you want further thoughts on the 2000 production of Superstar, you can check out some entries from April 2001.)
In that spirit, here are a couple of my favorite parts of those productions. (My favorite part of 1776 is actually right after the independence vote passes, when Adams just says, "It is done." But I couldn't find that online.)
In that spirit, here are a couple of my favorite parts of those productions. (My favorite part of 1776 is actually right after the independence vote passes, when Adams just says, "It is done." But I couldn't find that online.)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)